Referee - RESPECT!

[Dylan]

Ref had no consistency. If Berner got booked for a minor foul, why wasn't that Newcastle player booked when he fouled Gallagher just outside the penalty area.

[TrickyTrev]

I was furious at the time but watching it back, the ref didn't have an awful game.

Wellens was lucky not to be sent off for the first yellow and deserved a yellow for the second although a warning would have been nice. As fans, we should be more annoyed with Wellens for the two stupid fouls than the ref.

The challenge on Waghorn - Taylor got the ball and Waghorn happened to have got there a split second too late so he caught him on the follow-through and it looked terrible at the time because Waghorn got taken out.

Berner kicked their player in the knee as he ran past for the first yellow. Nowhere near the ball. Definite yellow and not comparable to the challenge on Waghorn.

Berner's second foul - that should have been a yellow really. I would have been spitting blood if he'd actually sent him off - incandescent - but it was a horrible tackle and deserved a yellow card. Again not near the ball.

The handball by Carroll was as blatant as anything. Unbelievable. I didn't spot it at the time though and neither did most of the crowd.

Howard's challenge wasn't that bad. I thought he won the ball to be honest, just in a bit of an agricultural fashion.

Whatever. Brilliant game, love those niggly games where the ref's decisions and some committed challenges get the crowd pumped up.

Agree with all of this, although the tackle on Waghorn should have been a free kick for dangerous play irrespective of him winning the ball. The Carroll decision looks terrible in slo-mo but no one in the ground saw it other than Gallagher.

[DB11]

So why did he not do the same for the similar yet worse foul on Waghorn? It's not what he did it's what he didn't do, there were other incidents where he failed to punish consistently.

The foul on Wellens prior to his first yellow, the foul on Galagher, the hand ball, Berner's 2nd tackle, Howard's tackle.

I thought he was consistent in his non-giving of decisions ie. pushes in the back from high balls; he just let the game go on. I think that his yellow cards were 'tactical' ie. to keep control of the game rather than the individual incidents, and it was just unlucky that it was Leicester committing those fouls at those particular moments.

Handball is very rarely given; it has to be deliberate handball... and why would a player deliberately handle the ball in his own box?! Although, I can quite clearly see the other basis of the argument; the players hands were in an unnatural position, he did it to make himself seem bigger. Would I have given the penalty? It would have annoyed one team (unlike some decisions that can be accepted) for sure, and if one team / crowd were being dicks, I think I'd have unknowlingly advantaged the other team

Penal offences, such as "the foul on Wellens prior to his first yellow", are all about opinions and angles. The referee must not have deemed it to be a foul, from his angle at least.

Unbelievable.

Also, I asked you the question earlier DB11 - How can you expect the respect campaign to work when so many blatent mistakes are made? - I always say the odd mistake is acceptable, I don't expect everyone to be perfect and make no mistakes, Everyone makes mistakes, but the quantity of mistakes made on average by the referee's is unacceptable, and the blatent, stupid, simple rules that the referee's get wrong are unacceptable.

I haven't seen this question; I'll answer it now: I don't. I'm no differnent in my posting of the referee than prior to the Respect campaign. It has no bearing on anything and I think it's a bit of a gimmick, to be honest. The referee has to earn respect, as does any person in any walk of life, but I am just giving my opinion on how I felt the referee performed. If I felt he'd been bad I'd say so or, the very least, not comment but if I don't think he has, I'll post about it - giving my opinion as you are giving yours - as I am doing so now.

DB11 obviously watched a different game to everyone else. There were at least 3 glaringly bad decisions against Leicester, the worst in my opinion was the yellow for Berner, which should probably been a yellow, but only seconds earlier it had been preceeded by an almost identical challenge, possibly worse as it was higher, by a Newcastle player.

Then there was also the Waghorn incident that DavieG mentioned.

And the handball... sorry, two handballs, both in the penalty area.

It wouldn't have been so bad if the bad decisions had evened out, but I can honestly say I can only think of one decision against Newcastle that I thought was harsh.

Back on your boat Mariner!

I didn't know Leicester had someone sent off until I saw it on the tv screens in the concourse

And who's second best.....Stuart Attwell?

Kevin Friend, obviously.

[lcfcadam]

Apologies if this has already been mentioned but I haven't noticed anyone complaining about the overall worst refereeing decision of the night.

Paul Gallagher's running towards the box in dangerous looking fashion, he turns away from the defender in order to open up a shooting chance only to be blatantly tripped by a player who's obviously decided to 'take one for the team' in order to prevent a great chance for us to score.

So when Andre Marriner doesn't book him, I bet he's as surprised as anyone...

That was a truly inexplicable decision.

[Trav Le Bleu]

I didn't know Leicester had someone sent off until I saw it on the tv screens in the concourse

Of which stadium?

[Heart-Shaped Fox]

I couldnt believe it when Waghorn was baltantly taken out whilst breaking away down the wing. How that was never a booking I dont know.

That foul on Gallagher was just as bad.

[lcfcalan]

It would be interesting to get Ray Winstons opinion on this ref if the ref were performing so poorly in a West Ham opponents favour.

Maybe he would remind the ref just who is the daddy, and forgo his respect campaign promotion fee ?

[Jimothy]

I couldnt believe it when Waghorn was baltantly taken out whilst breaking away down the wing. How that was never a booking I dont know.

That foul on Gallagher was just as bad.

If we're thinking of the same one, it was moments before Berner was booked. Which made it even more baffling.

I think as everyone said it about being consistent. Berner probably should have got a second yellow for his second half high tackle. Ryan Taylor was the one that hacked down Waghorn, no booking and then also pulled down Gallagher, for the free-kick that Carrol handled. Yet got a booking for neither. We just want to see the same punishment for each infringement.

[Jonezy]

What a biased bunch we are. No wonder refs are a having a hard time, when they can only do wrong. I really do think, Mr. Marriner had a decent game, and only the handball from Gallagher's freekick and lack of red card to Berner were incidents, where I think he got it wrong, and they kind of even themselves out.

Nobody mentions the tuggle between Brown and Carroll in our area and the ball hitting Brown's arm in our box near the end.

The plank of the night was Mr. Wellens not Mr. Marriner.

[davieG]

Handball is very rarely given; it has to be deliberate handball... and why would a player deliberately handle the ball in his own box?! Although, I can quite clearly see the other basis of the argument; the players hands were in an unnatural position, he did it to make himself seem bigger. Would I have given the penalty? It would have annoyed one team (unlike some decisions that can be accepted) for sure, and if one team / crowd were being dicks, I think I'd have unknowlingly advantaged the other team

Oh come on DB hand ball is often given these days for the most accidental ones, it used to be hand to ball - penalty, ball to hand - no penalty, but all I've heard in the past few years, to justify hand ball decisions is if your hand is where it shouldn't be, whatever that means then it's hand ball.

Re the Carroll (I presume it was him) penalty claim by any current yardstick his hand was where it shouldn't be.

Re the Butt penalty claim, the reviewer even talked about it not being hand to ball, has that suddenly become the rule again because if it has i must have missed it.

Just to reiterate my frustration with all refs, not just last nights is their total inconsistency in interpreting the rules often in clear cut circumstances.

[john_lcfc]

Ref had a decent game. Wellens deserved to go, stupid tackle then stopped their attack. Berner should have gone aswell. And you would have said the free kick handball penalty appeal was harsh if it was the other way round. Hard game for the referee, I thought he did pretty well overall.

[StanSP]

Ref had a decent game. Wellens deserved to go, stupid tackle then stopped their attack. Berner should have gone aswell. And you would have said the free kick handball penalty appeal was harsh if it was the other way round. Hard game for the referee, I thought he did pretty well overall.

Ridiculous!!

Why didn't Newcastle's player get booked for tripping our player just outside the box, when it was probably the same kind of foul that got Berner booked?

That's just one (and not the main) crap decision the referee made.

How you can say the ref had a decent game is beyond me.

[DB11]

Oh come on DB hand ball is often given these days for the most accidental ones, it used to be hand to ball - penalty, ball to hand - no penalty, but all I've heard in the past few years, to justify hand ball decisions is if your hand is where it shouldn't be, whatever that means then it's hand ball.

Re the Carroll (I presume it was him) penalty claim by any current yardstick his hand was where it shouldn't be.

Re the Butt penalty claim, the reviewer even talked about it not being hand to ball, has that suddenly become the rule again because if it has i must have missed it.

Just to reiterate my frustration with all refs, not just last nights is their total inconsistency in interpreting the rules often in clear cut circumstances.

I'm sorry, but you seem to basing your opinion from what you listen to the from the commentators. The commentators say what they think it should be, or at least what they want it to be, but you only have to listen to FA directives to referees and go to meetings to know what should (and is applied as directed) to the referees.

A penalty is a game-changing decision. It has to be thoroughly deserved / blatant for a referee to give it, and risk match control.

It'd be a lot easier if it could just be as simple as if the ball hits the hand, it's a free kick. It'd make decision-making a lot easier.

[Spiritwalker]

The ref must have had a good game, commentator Garry Birtles agreed with all of his decisions apart from the one where

he didn't send off Bruno Berner.

[davieG]

I'm sorry, but you seem to basing your opinion from what you listen to the from the commentators. The commentators say what they think it should be, or at least what they want it to be, but you only have to listen to FA directives to referees and go to meetings to know what should (and is applied as directed) to the referees.

A penalty is a game-changing decision. It has to be thoroughly deserved / blatant for a referee to give it, and risk match control.

It'd be a lot easier if it could just be as simple as if the ball hits the hand, it's a free kick. It'd make decision-making a lot easier.

I based my thoughts on having been at the game and then watching it on Sky replayed over and over, you just happen to have picked up on the commentator remark which was a throw away comment that caused me confusion as to the exact ruling. It did not affect my opinion of the decisions

You haven't explained all the penalties given in other games where it's been less obvious and less deliberate than the Carroll incident and much less influential on outcome than the Butt incident which in all probability was a certain goal.

Yes penalty claims are game changing events and in this case the Carroll one was definitely deserved/blatant even the Butt one based on the many penalties I've seen given was deserved.

Perhaps you could also explain what justifies a penalty, is it hand to ball, is it ball to hand if your hand is deemed to be in an unnatural position. As someone brought up solely on the hand to ball judgement I'm very much aware of penalties being given for 'hands in the wrong place' which i believe is wrong and there have been so many.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

If we're thinking of the same one, it was moments before Berner was booked. Which made it even more baffling.

I think as everyone said it about being consistent. Berner probably should have got a second yellow for his second half high tackle. Ryan Taylor was the one that hacked down Waghorn, no booking and then also pulled down Gallagher, for the free-kick that Carrol handled. Yet got a booking for neither. We just want to see the same punishment for each infringement.

If you were watching the reason Taylor wasn't booked was because the referee deemed it to be a fair challenge - a throw-in to leicester was awarded. Ok the tackle was a little tasty, but there were plenty of those with the most of then directed at and around the ball and he let them go - fair play to the ref.

Now had Steve Bennett have been refereeing on the other hand I expect it would been a very different game with 8 left on each side!

[marbelladave]

As I consider most footballers to be foul mouthed cheating bastards I usually support refs who have a very difficult job.

Yesterday all the critical decisions and most of the routing ones were given in Newcastles favour.

The tackle on Waghorn in the box was near identical to the one that earned Wellens his second card, consistency my arse!

Penalties are always contentious, for obvious reasons, but the current interpretation is that if a player deliberately raises his hand and blocks the ball it is a penalty and that is exactly what Carrol did. Undistbutable.

The second shout is more difficult, the defender does not move his arm to the ball but he is virtually on the line and the ball is goal bound. The handball saves a certain goal and should be a penalty although it would have been tough on the defender (Butt?) who was unlucky in that situation.

The Brown incident was somewhat similar to our second shout. The difference was Brown was not on the goal line and it was not a goalscoring opportunity, that would have been particularly unlucky.

The only decision to go in our favour was a wretched tackle from Berner that should have earned him a second yellow, but by then Marriner was so embarrassed, he didn't give it. (More dreadful inconsistency!)

[DB11]

I based my thoughts on having been at the game and then watching it on Sky replayed over and over, you just happen to have picked up on the commentator remark which was a throw away comment that caused me confusion as to the exact ruling. It did not affect my opinion of the decisions

You haven't explained all the penalties given in other games where it's been less obvious and less deliberate than the Carroll incident and much less influential on outcome than the Butt incident which in all probability was a certain goal.

Yes penalty claims are game changing events and in this case the Carroll one was definitely deserved/blatant even the Butt one based on the many penalties I've seen given was deserved.

Perhaps you could also explain what justifies a penalty, is it hand to ball, is it ball to hand if your hand is deemed to be in an unnatural position. As someone brought up solely on the hand to ball judgement I'm very much aware of penalties being given for 'hands in the wrong place' which i believe is wrong and there have been so many.

The speed / distance that the ball has travelled

But equally so, has the player tried to gain an advantage i.e. putting his hands out to make himself seem bigger

Has the player made any attempt to move his hand (or has he left it there to try and claim 'hand to ball' but still deliberately handled it)

'Hand-to-ball' and 'ball-to-hand' are non-existent theories.

[StanSP]

The speed / distance that the ball has travelled

But equally so, has the player tried to gain an advantage i.e. putting his hands out to make himself seem bigger

Has the player made any attempt to move his hand (or has he left it there to try and claim 'hand to ball' but still deliberately handled it)

'Hand-to-ball' and 'ball-to-hand' are non-existent theories.

In terms of yesterday, Andy Carroll moved part of his arm to block the ball. At the time the ball made contact with his arm, his arm wasn't blocking his face. He's moved it in the direction to block the ball.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

The speed / distance that the ball has travelled

But equally so, has the player tried to gain an advantage i.e. putting his hands out to make himself seem bigger

Has the player made any attempt to move his hand (or has he left it there to try and claim 'hand to ball' but still deliberately handled it)

'Hand-to-ball' and 'ball-to-hand' are non-existent theories.

Butt's an ex-United player so I expect the handball was cleverly deliberate while looking accidental - but considering the linesman was that side I expect the referee would not have seen it from his vantage point - certainly a linesmans call that one.

The slow mo replay seemed to show a little bit of intent, i.e. no great effort to remove his arm.

[davieG]

The speed / distance that the ball has travelled

But equally so, has the player tried to gain an advantage i.e. putting his hands out to make himself seem bigger

Has the player made any attempt to move his hand (or has he left it there to try and claim 'hand to ball' but still deliberately handled it)

'Hand-to-ball' and 'ball-to-hand' are non-existent theories.

They maybe non-existent now but they were the norm for many a year.

I'll say again, for the last time I've seen many a handball given that doesn't match your definition both for and against Leicester and for teams I have no allegiance to and at the time I've been mildly angered by the unfairness of the decision. i believe i even started a topic on it in the past.

I'll also add that the reason that players like Wellens who commit, on the face of it stupid fouls as his 2nd booking was because they see players doing similar and getting away with it time and time again, as I mentioned earlier Waghorn was fouled in a similar yet more robust fashion in the penalty area and it was totally ignored.

You'll not convince me that yesterday provided a consistent (and I don't mean biased) performance from the referee.

[marbelladave]

They maybe non-existent now but they were the norm for many a year.

I'll say again, for the last time I've seen many a handball given that doesn't match your definition both for and against Leicester and for teams I have no allegiance to and at the time I've been mildly angered by the unfairness of the decision. i believe i even started a topic on it in the past.

I'll also add that the reason that players like Wellens who commit, on the face of it stupid fouls as his 2nd booking was because they see players doing similar and getting away with it time and time again, as I mentioned earlier Waghorn was fouled in a similar yet more robust fashion in the penalty area and it was totally ignored.

You'll not convince me that yesterday provided a consistent (and I don't mean biased) performance from the referee.

Spot on davie.

Players play to the referee, not the Law book. Week in, week out decisions are given in a specific fashion with a fair degree of consistency, when they are not the players are clearly at a loss,

There should be consistency from game to game, every week the Carrol handball is given as a penalty, why was it not yesterday?

Similarly within a game the same thing applies. A clumsy tackle from behind with a hand on the attacker is either a foul or it is not. It is not a yellow card one minute and waved away the next! Complete nonsense.

[orangecity23]

While we're on the subject of good/bad refereeing performances, I'm going to bring up the home game against Sheff W as an example of fantastic refereeing. That ref was consistent throughout the entire match, even handed, and at the time I couldn't see a single decision in the match that I could disagree with. Lo and behold, with that consistency, it ended with very few players getting booked. It's no surprise that Wellens charged into his first yellow tackle yesterday, after he himself got taken out shortly before that (with no punishment), he probably thought he could get away with it.

[lildave3]

I think I need to watch this game again because I thought he did alright.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Spot on davie.

Players play to the referee, not the Law book. Week in, week out decisions are given in a specific fashion with a fair degree of consistency, when they are not the players are clearly at a loss,

There should be consistency from game to game, every week the Carrol handball is given as a penalty, why was it not yesterday?

Similarly within a game the same thing applies. A clumsy tackle from behind with a hand on the attacker is either a foul or it is not. It is not a yellow card one minute and waved away the next! Complete nonsense.

You forget that referees are human not robotic instruments and many decisions they make will have different view points, especially when a decision effects a team you want to win.

Personally, I wouldn't want consistant, know where you stand refereeing - where would the fun it that be? The best atmosphere at games tend to be caused by refereeing decisions or non-decisions and we'd have one less subject to make into a 13 page thread (only leaving maddog's insane rants).